You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Effects of Neck-Specific Exercises Compared to Waiting List for Individuals With Chronic Whiplash-Associated Disorders: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Archives of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.apmr.2015.10.087 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anneli Peolsson, Maria Landén Ludvigsson, Ann-Marie Tigerfors, Gunnel Peterson |
| Abstract |
To determine, whether 3-months of neck-specific exercises could benefit individuals with chronic whiplash-associated disorders (WAD) who were on a waiting list for treatment. A prospective, randomized controlled study SETTING: Primary health care PARTICIPANTS: 41 individuals (31 women, 10 men; mean age=38 y, SD=11.2) with chronic (6 to 36 months) WAD, grades 2 and 3, were analyzed. Patients were randomized to neck-specific exercises (NSE) or no treatment for 3 months. Neck-specific disability (Neck Disability Index; NDI), neck pain (Visual Analogue Scale), general pain-related disability (Pain Disability Index; PDI), self-perceived performance ability (the Self-Efficacy Scale; SES), and health-related quality of life (EuroQol five dimensions; EQ-5D) were measured. NSE significantly improved the NDI, SES, and EQ5D compared to waiting list (<0.01). There was significant improvement (p<0.0001) over time in all outcomes for NSE, and, apart from the PDI, significant worsening (p=0.002 to 0.0002) over time for the untreated group. NSE were more beneficial than no intervention while on a waiting list for individuals with chronic WAD. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 30% |
| Spain | 1 | 10% |
| United States | 1 | 10% |
| Ireland | 1 | 10% |
| Denmark | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 70% |
| Scientists | 3 | 30% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 229 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 227 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 35 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 29 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 17 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 16 | 7% |
| Researcher | 15 | 7% |
| Other | 41 | 18% |
| Unknown | 76 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 56 | 24% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 49 | 21% |
| Sports and Recreations | 8 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 6 | 3% |
| Psychology | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 20 | 9% |
| Unknown | 85 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 February 2016.
All research outputs
#6,238,835
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation
#1,903
of 6,026 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,771
of 295,174 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation
#21
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,026 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 295,174 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.